This post has been edited 3 time(s), it was last edited by conall88: 05.08.2010 03:25.

I'm amazed you guys don't have a list of files to be translated, and allow the community to do the legwork. a lot of people want the content asap, and many are able and willing to do it i'm sure. I have a reasonable quality of french for example, so I could translate from french to english without much difficulty i'm sure.

wiki format would be perfect for such a community orientated method.

as a business, surely you see the value in removing unncessary workload

the reason for this is because the MMS is still under development - so we're not quite there yet.

As for the translation: Our translations are usually done by freelancers from the community. A wiki is certainly nice, but due to the free for all editing, we wouldn't be able to ensure a certain level of quality that our users have become accustomed to

Originally posted by Huckebein
the MSS Adv. will ofc be released in english as well. Due to a lack of ressources it isn't released yet, but we are working on it.

Please don't. There are so many more important topics than revisiting the short-stack strategy.

In English its been well-defined that 1-40bb is short, 40-150ish is mid and 150+ is deep. Please stop confusing things with poor translations like "big stack strategy" and then redefining mid-stack to mean something new.

the Mss is a totally different strategy than the SSS. Don't get your point. The midstack refers to the buyin amount, which is whether the minimum nor the maximum buy-in.

In English its been well-defined that 1-40bb is short, 40-150ish is mid and 150+ is deep. Please stop confusing things with poor translations like "big stack strategy" and then redefining mid-stack to mean something new

Where did you get your def? It is definitely wrong. You never consider a stack with more than 100BB as midstack. That is simply wrong, even in english there has never been such a definition. Could you post the link to your definition?

In addition, our MSS follows your def. of midstack as well? So what do you mean that Pokerstrategy.com redefines common definitions. Don't get it.

Originally posted by Huckebein
Where did you get your def? It is definitely wrong.

It is most definitely correct and supported by decades of literature and a culture of poker that predates the internet and online poker. You can find such a definition in modern books by Ed Miller, David Sklansky, and Dan Harrington.

I think the best explanation was given in Professional No-limit Hold'em where the section on buy-ins and stack sizes concludes with:

A short stack is 40BB or less.
A deep stack is 200BB of more.
A medium stack is in between.

It continues with the comment, "Notice that a 100BB stack counts as a medium stack."

I could certainly find earlier references, that book was published in 2007, but I would be hard pressed to find more prestigious ones.

thanks for taking the effort for posting the definition. Anyway, I still disagree that you consider stacks with more than 100BB as midstack. Most of the actual literature and poker videos (english) consider 100BB as Fullstack (though not deep). On most of the online poker sites there were no dedicated deep tables some time ago, where you could buy in for more than a midstack regading your cited definition. That's probably why we disagree on the def. In live play i certainly agree that stacks are deeper there, but in online play 100BB is considered as Full- or Bigstack. If you buy-in for the full amount on a regular table, why should you consider it as midstack?

1. BSS: it is common at least for online poker, that someone buying in for 100BB will be considered as big- or fullstack, as long as it is no dedicated deepstacktable.

2. MSS: There are many possibly MSS- strategies possible. We recommend to buy-in with 40BB, others with 50BB so this is the bottom end of your cited definition. How could we call it instead? The buy-in amount is the one for mid stacks.

Originally posted by tokyoaces
It is most definitely correct and supported by decades of literature and a culture of poker that predates the internet and online poker. You can find such a definition in modern books by Ed Miller, David Sklansky, and Dan Harrington.

On Ed Miller's blog someone asked:
"Ed,

could you please clarify the discrepancy between the stack size measurements in GSIHE vs. those listed in PNL v1. Do you prefer to use the newer stack size measurements as they are listed in PNL?

GSIHE:

25BB or less is a small stack

25-100BB is a medium stack

100BB or more is a big stack

PNL:

40BB or less is a short stack

200BB or more is a deep stack

in between (100BB) is a medium stack"

Ed Miller's answer was:

"Well, I think it's largely irrelevant whether you declare that "medium" stacks begin at 25BB or 40BB. You can use either metric you choose.

What's not irrelevant is to understand that strategies change significantly as the stack size increases from 25BB to 40BB. A 40BB stack is more postflop focused than a 25BB stack."

Originally posted by adr0001
"Well, I think it's largely irrelevant whether you declare that "medium" stacks begin at 25BB or 40BB. You can use either metric you choose."

Cool, thanks for the info.

That still means his definition of medium stacks is the whole range of 25bb to 100bb. So at most an article and one or two videos on dealing with stack size changes in cash games. We don't need two full strategies about how to rathole money.

We could use a lot more articles/videos on SH play especially aimed at beginners. After all it is the most popular gametype at FL and NL. There are some intermediate videos but not much introductory stuff.

All the videos and series coming out on the English side coming out are great. It would be sad to see a large amount of resources misdirected towards MSS when SSS still works on Stars, FTP, and Party.